One Community Auto, LLC (W911s720q0024)

B-419311 Dec 16, 2020 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights One Community Auto, LLC (OCA), a small business of Albuquerque, New Mexico, protests the issuance of a requirements contract to Iron Horse Logistics, a small business of Durango, Colorado, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. W911S720Q0024, issued by the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command, to purchase what the agency terms "contact cars" for use at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The protester argues that the solicitation's evaluation factors were "ambiguous or indefinite," and challenges the agency's evaluation of its quotation. Protest at 1. We dismiss the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  One Community Auto, LLC File:  B-419311 Date:  December 16, 2020 Gary Peterson for the protester. Captain Ethan Chae, Sean Connolly, Esq., and Andrew J. Smith, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Hannah G. Barnes, and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging an agency’s evaluation of protester’s quotation under the price evaluation factor is dismissed where the record shows that the solicitation contained a patent ambiguity that the vendor did not raise prior to submission of its quotation.  DECISION One Community Auto, LLC (OCA), a small business of Albuquerque, New Mexico, protests the issuance of a requirements contract to Iron Horse Logistics, a small business of Durango, Colorado, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. W911S720Q0024, issued by the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command, to purchase what the agency terms “contact cars” for use at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.[1]  The protester argues that the solicitation’s evaluation factors were “ambiguous or indefinite,” and challenges the agency’s evaluation of its quotation.  Protest at 1.  We dismiss the protest.    BACKGROUND On August 28, 2020, the agency posted on the System for Award Management (SAM) website an RFQ to purchase cars with certain specifications for use at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.  Req. for Dismissal at 1.  The solicitation, issued under the commercial item procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation part 12, contemplated awarding a requirements contract to supply the contact cars and provided for a 1-year base period and four 1-year option periods.  Req. for Dismissal at 2.  The agency issued the RFQ as a service-disabled veteran-owned small business set-aside.  RFQ at 1, 25.  The RFQ stated that the contract would be awarded to the vendor whose quotation conformed to the solicitation and was “most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.”  RFQ at 23.  The solicitation listed three factors that the agency would use to evaluate quotations:  technical, past performance, and price.  Id.  For the technical factor, the solicitation provided that quotations would be evaluated to ensure both that“the technical capability of the items meet the requirements stated in the Technical evaluation” and that “the timelines established in the technical evaluation for delivery and pick up are addressed and if they can be met.”  Id.  The past performance factor stated that the quotation would “be evaluated to see if the contractor has a history of past performance in supplying a similar need for the Government” and clarified that “[a] lack of past performance will not eliminate anyone from consideration.”  Id.  With regard to price, the RFQ stated only that responses would be evaluated to ensure that the price is fair and reasonable.  Id.  The solicitation provided that the three factors were listed “in order of importance . . . as follows,” with technical capability listed first, past performance listed next, and price listed last.  RFQ at 23.  Finally, the solicitation emphasized that “Technical and past performance, when combined, are NOT more important than price.”  Id.  The agency received quotations from five vendors, including the protester and the awardee.  Agency Debriefing letter at 1.  On October 2, the Army notified the protester that the contract had been awarded to another vendor.  Req.